ComSuper members receive employer contributions of more than 17 per cent of their income. Photo: Frances Mocnik

The report said 36 per cent of Australians over 65 lived below the poverty line. In contrast, the OECD average was just 12.6 per cent. A single person in Australia, whose only income is the age pension, receives $22,000 a year, only barely above the Australia-wide poverty line, which is estimated at $20,800. It's a shocking statistic, of which we should be ashamed.

With this information, it is surprising that, in the past week, the loudest outcry on the subject of pensions has been from a group of relatively well-off retired public servants who receive superannuation entitlements. A change to government policy and Centrelink rules has meant that some former bureaucrats – about 35,000 – had the part-age pension they were receiving reduced or cut off completely at the start of January.

These retirees already receive a defined-benefit pension thanks to their membership of the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (CSS) or the Public Sector Superannuation Scheme (PSS). Previously, these members had large portions of their super pensions exempt from being counted as income for Centrelink purposes, but this benefit has now reduced. The change brings income tests for former public servants in line with those applied to the rest of the public applying for age pensions.

Logically, the previous income test seems ridiculous. Why should former public servants have different rules from the rest of the public? The CSS and PSS schemes are already extremely generous, so much so that the government closed the CSS to new members in 1990 and the PSS to new members in 2005 because it was decided that the cost of the schemes would be too much for the country to bear if they continued. CSS and PSS superannuants can also retire earlier than those without super; the schemes' rules allow members to leave the workforce (even if only briefly) and claim a pension at 55. Those who rely solely on the age pension in retirement can't currently receive benefits until they are 65.

Advertisement

In 2015, the Financial Review's Veronica Burgess took a look at the figures, and estimated that the minimum employer super contribution to contributing CSS and PSS members in 2014 was 17.4 per cent. It's a figure the rest of Australians, who receive only 9.5 per cent in employer contributions, can only dream of.

Not to mention the fact that while the superannuation guarantee was only legislated in 1992, ensuring every Australian would receive a contribution to their retirement from their employer. This was designed to try to ease the burden on the welfare system as Australia's population aged, creating a safety net for the future. For anyone working in 1992, the guarantee figure was set at 3 per cent of their salary, before increasing over the past two decades to the 9.5 per cent received today. In contrast, the federal government's super schemes have been in place since 1926, guaranteeing much higher contributions to its employees than the super guarantee has ever given the rest of us.

Yet, still, former public servants, who are much better off in retirement than most other pensioners, throw tantrums about changes to Centrelink. They should count their lucky stars that they were employed by the government and received these super entitlements, unlike most of the population. Instead of complaining, spare a thought for the next generation, who despite a lifetime's worth of super contributions probably won't be able to afford a carefree retirement, and who won't have assets to fall back on as buying a house falls further out of reach. Baby boomers, particularly those in government super schemes, lived in the age of entitlement, and need to start accepting that it's over.

Lauren Ingram is a journalist who once worked at ComSuper. Twitter: @laureningram